History
  • No items yet
midpage
Knupp v. Bright
186 Pa. 181
Pa.
1898
Check Treatment
Per Curiam,

We find nothing in this record that would justify us in sustaining either of the specifications of error.

- The able and ingenious argument of defendant’s counsel failed to convince us that the learned trial judge did not correctly answer all the points recited in said specifications. On the contrary, we think his construction of the contract sued on was substantially correct, as were his answers to each of the points referred to. There is nothing in any of the questions involved that requires discussion.

Judgment affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Knupp v. Bright
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Date Published: May 16, 1898
Citation: 186 Pa. 181
Docket Number: Appeal, No. 354
Court Abbreviation: Pa.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.